Are timetables over-padded to avoid Delay Repay?

[RobertsN]

I'm just curious on this one and I'd appreciate any (polite) input on the issue.

I just noticed a train leaving Stratford-upon-Avon (SAV) 25 and 1/4 minutes late. I know there are 4 request stops along the way, however, most of them don't have a clear line of sight to approach at line speed.

However, by Tyseley, the delay was down to 8 minutes (admittedly with 2 minutes engineering allowance). If a train can do the trip in around 15 minutes - subtracting the engineering allowance, does this mean timetables are padded out to reduce the chance of delay repayment or what else does it actually mean? There are no complicated junctions before hitting Tyseley, so if that much can be knocked off that easily, there may be something not quite right?

BTW, the train was down to +1 by Birmingham Moor Street (with an additional engineering minute). For reference, 2K73 today from SAV.



I have also noticed that the timings into Marylebone from Neasden stand at up to 11 minutes for 5 miles of track (and I don't believe most of it is done at around 30 mph). The reason I mention this is that quite often when travelling into London with a significant delay we suddenly pick up quite a few minutes in the last bit to avoid hitting the 15-minute mark of lateness. I can understand an additional minute or 2 due to station throat congestion, but it does seem a bit too much.

 

[Merseysider]

Something weird is going on with RTT there - the train cannot have left Henley at 2001, reached the lakes 2002, reached Earleswood at 2004 and then reversed to Wood End for 2006 followed by another change of direction to Wythall at 2007

 

[Bletchleyite]

In short, yes, it's been going on for years.

The most ridiculous one, of which Ryanair would be proud, is Wrexham Central, where the inbound train is timed at xx47 and the outbound, formed of the same unit, is timed at xx46, which is obviously impossible.

 

[RobertsN]

Something weird is going on with RTT there - the train cannot have left Henley at 2001, reached the lakes 2002, reached Earleswood at 2004 and then reversed to Wood End for 2006 followed by another change of direction to Wythall at 2007

However, it does appear to have reached Moor Street only 1 late...

I can understand some of the sections may not be too accurate (Wilmcote to Whitlock's End and Shirley to Tyseley). However, given the traffic of the excluded locations, I would expect reporting to be relatively acurate elsewhere.

What I mean is that the train left 25 minutes late from the origin and 1 hour (timetabled) later it was only 1 late...

 

[the sniper]

Surely this ran non-stop and there aren't many timing points (or whatever the correct terminology is) on the darkest bit of the dark side, so it just auto fills times for most stations?

 

[RobertsN]

Surely this ran non-stop and there aren't many timing points (or whatever the correct terminology is) on the darkest bit of the dark side, so it just auto fills times for most stations?

In any case, Whitlock's End and Shirley are the places a lot of trains reverse so there is no "auto" signalling, so those should be reliable timing points. I dare hazard that Birmingham Moor Street (BMO) should be a reliable timing point?

 

[_toommm_]

On its way to Birmingham Moor Street, every stop was cancelled but Whitlocks End and Shirley. 14 stops cancelled, so with the braking curve of stopping at the stations eliminated, plus two minutes engineering allowance, it seems about right.

 

[louis97]

In any case, Whitlock's End and Shirley are the places a lot of trains reverse so there is no "auto" signalling, so those should be reliable timing points. I dare hazard that Birmingham Moor Street (BMO) should be a reliable timing point?

Nothing reversing at Shirley anymore, the crossover was moved to Whitlocks End. The line is accurate from departure from Whitlocks End going towards Birmingham, to arrival at Whitlock End going away from Birmingham. Between Whitlocks End and Stratford the signalling is limited, so the provision for accurate data is reduced - especially in scenarios where trains don't run as booked, like here.

 

[JustPassingBy]

Recent train times shows it correctly:

Service Information - Recent Train Times

www.recenttraintimes.co.uk

The data on Recent Train Times is a mixture of Trust and Darwin.
Darwin can report skipped stops, as here, which Recent Train Times makes use of.

 

[RobertsN]

On its way to Birmingham Moor Street, every stop was cancelled but Whitlocks End and Shirley. 14 stops cancelled, so with the braking curve of stopping at the stations eliminated, plus two minutes engineering allowance, it seems about right.

So does this mean anyone wanting to board in between was left to wonder when the next train was? Not what one would expect of a railway service.

I've had the unfortunate experience of WMT cancelling 3 consecutive (hourly) trains on this section on an afternoon. Great if you're expecting to catch the 2:xx PM train and the next one is 5:xx PM... NOT a good user experience.

P.S. Add to that the bus replacement service sailed right through the mandated stop ignoring any frantic hand signals...

P.S.2: This thread is not meant to lambast WMT, just an (unfortunate) railway experience.

 

[Nova1]

So does this mean anyone wanting to board in between was left to wonder when the next train was? Not what one would expect of a railway service

Generally when WMR do this they do correctly show the train as cancelled at relevant stations and on their apps/journey planners

P.S. Add to that the bus replacement service sailed right through the mandated stop ignoring any frantic hand signals...

I've found this to be a regular occurrence of WMR rail replacement services that are organized at short notice, buses just never showing up at intermediate stations, can only ever rely on them at terminus stations

Also worth noting that the train you've screenshotted, in basic view it shows "not stopping" - although it probably didn't stop at Wootton Wawen then didn't stop Danzey-Earlswood

Realtime Trains | 1927 Stratford-upon-Avon to Kidderminster | 12/08/2022

Real-time train running information for 1927 departure from Stratford-upon-Avon to Kidderminster on 12/08/2022. From Realtime Trains, an independent source of train running info for Great Britain.

www.realtimetrains.co.uk

 

[RobertsN]

Generally when WMR do this they do correctly show the train as cancelled at relevant stations and on their apps/journey planners

Agreed, but not any further information on how the heck to get back home... (see next part). Help point absolutely useless in some of the stations. Just rehashed "standard" responses, no real information.

I've found this to be a regular occurrence of WMR rail replacement services that are organized at short notice, buses just never showing up at intermediate stations, can only ever rely on them at terminus stations

Goes back to an awful user experience...

Nothing reversing at Shirley anymore, the crossover was moved to Whitlocks End. The line is accurate from departure from Whitlocks End going towards Birmingham, to arrival at Whitlock End going away from Birmingham. Between Whitlocks End and Stratford the signalling is limited, so the provision for accurate data is reduced - especially in scenarios where trains don't run as booked, like here.

BTW, the crossover is still at Shirley. The trains run wrong-line back to Shirley (under signals) before crossing over.

 

[louis97]

BTW, the crossover is still at Shirley. The trains run wrong-line back to Shirley (under signals) before crossing over.

Its not, the crossover was moved when the line was resignalled. Its 100 metres ish north of the station at Whitlocks End.

 

[leytongabriel]

Westbound 'Golden Valley' trains seem to have massive amounts of padding with prolonged stops at Reading and Swindon where they arrive 'early'.

 

[TheEdge]

Westbound 'Golden Valley' trains seem to have massive amounts of padding with prolonged stops at Reading and Swindon where they arrive 'early'.

Its not a conspiracy, its sensible timetabling. We could timetable everything to run to the exact minute that is theoretically possible. But as soon as you get an old lady taking more than the allowed 30 seconds to get on, or a driver not getting the line speed quick enough or braking too early the entire thing will fall apart very fast. Padding allows for those small times losses that happen hundreds of times a day across the network but still mean most trains will arrive at conflict points at the right time and not cause a real delay.

A prolonged stop at Reading means if it picks up time between London and Reading it still hits Reading itself and the junctions there at the right time. Same at Swindon to cross onto the Golden Valley line, and the same result hitting the triangle at Gloucester.

This sort of thing really isn't some nasty conspiracy to get out of Delay Repay, its not even a UK thing, look at intercity services in Europe, they do it all the time by sitting at stations for 2/3 minutes at all stations and sometime 5/10 at large ones.

 

[Peter0124]

In short, yes, it's been going on for years.

The most ridiculous one, of which Ryanair would be proud, is Wrexham Central, where the inbound train is timed at xx47 and the outbound, formed of the same unit, is timed at xx46, which is obviously impossible.

Has the service that did the Wrexham shuttle today ran late all day according to RTT ?

 

[centraltrains]

It's not uncommon for Stratford trains to be ~10 minutes late across the day with tight turnrounds at both Stratford (via Shirley) & Kidderminster, however I believe today's issues were a track fault around Kidderminster?

The signalling is much more sparse past Whitlocks End, Tracksy shows this well https://traksy.uk/live/M+31+THELAKS+-9

The 1827 might be a better study as this was similarly late departing Stratford but not expressed, making up 5 mins by Shirley (a further small delay was incurred at Yardley Wood due to mobility assistance). https://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/service/gb-nr:P96581/2022-08-12/detailed



I think it's generally differences between passenger published timetables and WTT which is regarded as "sneaky" time padding? (although this is usually only a couple minutes)

 

[Nova1]

however I believe today's issues were a track fault around Kidderminster?

Temporary Speed Restriction around Yardley Wood (I think)

 

[Coolzac]

I think a little bit of padding in the timetable is sensible - however does anyone have examples of excessive padding?

 

[Doctor Fegg]

This sort of thing really isn't some nasty conspiracy to get out of Delay Repay, its not even a UK thing, look at intercity services in Europe, they do it all the time by sitting at stations for 2/3 minutes at all stations and sometime 5/10 at large ones.

So much this. I remember my first time travelling on Swiss railways. For the past n years I'd swallowed the propaganda about "Switzerland does it right, why can't our railways be so punctual". Turns out it's really easy to be punctual if you schedule a 3-4 minute stop at each station.

 

[riceuten]

I always assumed the padding was there to avoid penalty payments for late running (to the Department, not passengers)

 

[CapabilityB]

I'm just curious on this one and I'd appreciate any (polite) input on the issue.

I just noticed a train leaving Stratford-upon-Avon (SAV) 25 and 1/4 minutes late. I know there are 4 request stops along the way, however, most of them don't have a clear line of sight to approach at line speed.

However, by Tyseley, the delay was down to 8 minutes (admittedly with 2 minutes engineering allowance). If a train can do the trip in around 15 minutes - subtracting the engineering allowance, does this mean timetables are padded out to reduce the chance of delay repayment or what else does it actually mean? There are no complicated junctions before hitting Tyseley, so if that much can be knocked off that easily, there may be something not quite right?

BTW, the train was down to +1 by Birmingham Moor Street (with an additional engineering minute). For reference, 2K73 today from SAV.

View attachment 119142

I have also noticed that the timings into Marylebone from Neasden stand at up to 11 minutes for 5 miles of track (and I don't believe most of it is done at around 30 mph). The reason I mention this is that quite often when travelling into London with a significant delay we suddenly pick up quite a few minutes in the last bit to avoid hitting the 15-minute mark of lateness. I can understand an additional minute or 2 due to station throat congestion, but it does seem a bit too much.

Others have explained what happened with this specific train, but in response to the question in the thread title, the answer is: no, there is no padding, especially not on the scale that would avoid delay repay.

The financial benefit to TOCs of being able to advertise the minimum possible journey time is significant. Even the practise of long distance trains having 2-3 minutes of performance time just before terminal stations to help with PPM reduced a few years ago.

There is a lot of work which goes on across TOC and NR performance teams to review run times with the aim of them being both robust and without unnecessary buffer. In many instances, an early train can have as big an impact on network performance as a late one.

So much this. I remember my first time travelling on Swiss railways. For the past n years I'd swallowed the propaganda about "Switzerland does it right, why can't our railways be so punctual". Turns out it's really easy to be punctual if you schedule a 3-4 minute stop at each station.

One of the things that people who rave about the Swiss approach don't realise is that it prioritises connectivity over direct journey times (which seems to be the obsession in the UK). At the hub stations, all trains have a fairly significant wait to allow interchange.

 

[riceuten]

There is a lot of work which goes on across TOC and NR performance teams to review run times with the aim of them being both robust and without unnecessary buffer.

Realtime Trains | 1P79 0324 Peterborough to London Kings Cross | 12/08/2022

Real-time train running information for 1P79 0324 departure from Peterborough to London Kings Cross on 12/08/2022. From Realtime Trains, an independent source of train running info for Great Britain.

www.realtimetrains.co.uk

0323 train from Peterborough to Kings X has 10 minutes scheduled from FPK to an almost empty KGX

Realtime Trains | 2C38 1552 London Kings Cross to Cambridge | 12/08/2022

Real-time train running information for 2C38 1552 departure from London Kings Cross to Cambridge on 12/08/2022. From Realtime Trains, an independent source of train running info for Great Britain.

www.realtimetrains.co.uk

1638 train in the middle of the rush hour has 5 minutes scheduled for the same journey

That kind of "unnecessary buffer"?

 

[TheEdge]

Realtime Trains | 1P79 0324 Peterborough to London Kings Cross | 12/08/2022

Real-time train running information for 1P79 0324 departure from Peterborough to London Kings Cross on 12/08/2022. From Realtime Trains, an independent source of train running info for Great Britain.

www.realtimetrains.co.uk

0323 train from Peterborough to Kings X has 10 minutes scheduled from FPK to an almost empty KGX

Realtime Trains | 2C38 1552 London Kings Cross to Cambridge | 12/08/2022

Real-time train running information for 2C38 1552 departure from London Kings Cross to Cambridge on 12/08/2022. From Realtime Trains, an independent source of train running info for Great Britain.

www.realtimetrains.co.uk

1638 train in the middle of the rush hour has 5 minutes scheduled for the same journey

That kind of "unnecessary buffer"?

Right. Lets pull this apart a bit.

Firstly, you are comparing opposites there. One is inbound in the graveyard shift, one is outbound during the peak. Inbounds into terminals will always be slower than outbounds. Moving to the route I sign into Liverpool Street, trains are entering that queue at 40mph but trundling towards the throat at 15mph so you end up bunching up and slowing down. But once my rear axle is free of the throat leaving I'm doing 40 out of there, and the guy a few minutes in front of me is already doing 70 and probably thinking about braking for Stratford a few miles ahead.

Secondly, your slow padded example is a middle of the night service and has come round the Hertford Loop rather than down the ECML, an educated guess would say that combined with freights and any ECS movements south of Alexandra Palace probably calls for extra padding.

Finally look at the line codes. Your fast service is staying on one line from Belle Isle to Finsbury Park, so it'll be shifting faster than your slow example which is changing from Up Slow 1 to Up Fast to Up "whatever E stands for", so its negotiating pointwork, which will slow it down.

https://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/service/gb-nr:W78542/2022-08-12/detailed is a better comparison. 6 minutes booked vs 9 for your slow example. Throw in the moving lines and a bit of additional padding as discussed that doesn't seem excessive. Your example does it in 7 so 9 doesn't seem too unreasonable for the end of a 77 mile trip thats taking a secondary route.

 

[CapabilityB]

Realtime Trains | 1P79 0324 Peterborough to London Kings Cross | 12/08/2022

Real-time train running information for 1P79 0324 departure from Peterborough to London Kings Cross on 12/08/2022. From Realtime Trains, an independent source of train running info for Great Britain.

www.realtimetrains.co.uk

0323 train from Peterborough to Kings X has 10 minutes scheduled from FPK to an almost empty KGX

Realtime Trains | 2C38 1552 London Kings Cross to Cambridge | 12/08/2022

Real-time train running information for 2C38 1552 departure from London Kings Cross to Cambridge on 12/08/2022. From Realtime Trains, an independent source of train running info for Great Britain.

www.realtimetrains.co.uk

1638 train in the middle of the rush hour has 5 minutes scheduled for the same journey

That kind of "unnecessary buffer"?

Mostly engineering allowances which would be in there for either speed restrictions or reduced line availability overnight.

I would hope that the pathing allowances are needed to maintain safe headways and junction margins, but I'm not going to check.

Only 1 minute of performance allowance in the examples you mention

 

[riceuten]

Right. Lets pull this apart a bit.

Firstly, you are comparing opposites there. One is inbound in the graveyard shift, one is outbound during the peak. Inbounds into terminals will always be slower than outbounds. Moving to the route I sign into Liverpool Street, trains are entering that queue at 40mph but trundling towards the throat at 15mph so you end up bunching up and slowing down. But once my rear axle is free of the throat leaving I'm doing 40 out of there, and the guy a few minutes in front of me is already doing 70 and probably thinking about braking for Stratford a few miles ahead.

Secondly, your slow padded example is a middle of the night service and has come round the Hertford Loop rather than down the ECML, an educated guess would say that combined with freights and any ECS movements south of Alexandra Palace probably calls for extra padding.

Finally look at the line codes. Your fast service is staying on one line from Belle Isle to Finsbury Park, so it'll be shifting faster than your slow example which is changing from Up Slow 1 to Up Fast to Up "whatever E stands for", so its negotiating pointwork, which will slow it down.

https://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/service/gb-nr:W78542/2022-08-12/detailed is a better comparison. 6 minutes booked vs 9 for your slow example. Throw in the moving lines and a bit of additional padding as discussed that doesn't seem excessive. Your example does it in 7 so 9 doesn't seem too unreasonable for the end of a 77 mile trip thats taking a secondary route.

I'm solely talking about the stretch from Finsbury Park to Kings Cross.

 

[TheEdge]

I'm solely talking about the stretch from Finsbury Park to Kings Cross.

So am I. I used the Liverpool Street example as its one I can quantify but its the same for any terminal.

The train you quoted takes a strange route but its most usual to put the most padding immediately prior to the last stop, so that strange route will be accounted for between Finsbury Park and Kings Cross.

And all those line changes happen between Finsbury Park and Kings Cross.

 

[gingerheid]

It's a very interestingly British attitude to regard the slightest amount of leeway or slack as a potential scam (or in other circumstances laziness or waste etc)!

 

[Neptune]

Padding was there long before delay repay.

Surely it’s better to get to your destination on time than go with the purpose of getting some money back or have we become such a grabbing society that scamming money out of the railway is fair game but we’re annoyed that the railway isn’t playing ball.

 

[Spartacus]

I'm solely talking about the stretch from Finsbury Park to Kings Cross.

It's got no performance time (often erroneously called padding) between Finsbury Park and KX, and only 1 minute prior to it. What it does have is 1 minute engineering time and 2.5 minutes pathing time.

You'll typically find most services have very little if any performance time, they're far more likely to have engineering or pathing time, neither of which is designed to provide 'padding' even if it can appear so at times when some time is recovered when for instance a speed restriction is removed, possession is cancelled or lifted early or a particular train you're meant to be slowed by isn't there at the prescribed time and date that you are so you get a faster run than booked.

What you also get is the less visible adjustment time, which is there for things like, but not limited to, adjusting for braking before a junction or pointwork with a slower speed than the mainline, often with approach control signals, or when running into an occupied platform. That's less likely to see time recovered, but can do, especially in the case of platform occupation, if the other train occupying your platform isn't there when your train is approaching.